Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more readability and compatible
From: Caesar Wang
Date: Thu Sep 24 2015 - 22:18:21 EST
Daniel,
å 2015å09æ25æ 08:25, Daniel Lezcano åé:
Hi Caesar,
so thinking a bit more about this patch. I would like to split it into
two. One fixing the NO_IRQ and another fixing the dsb().
IIUC, the ARMv8 support is not yet ready and dsb() is not necessary as
a fix for the previous kernel version. However, the timer is used with
the ARMv7 boards and the NO_IRQ should be merged into tip-urgent.
I already done the fix and I am ready to submit it (for the timer
keystone also). So I suggest your resend the dsb() fix only.
Regarding the indentation, I prefer you do that in a separate patch by
cleaning up the macros (if relevant) or send the patch to trivial@
I know the indentation is trivial for this driver, but I just send the
patch v2.
-- Daniel
On 09/22/2015 07:15 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
Hi Heiko,
å 2015å09æ22æ 22:00, Heiko StÃbner åé:
Hi Caesar,
Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 16:51:09 schrieb Caesar Wang:
Build the arm64 SoCs (e.g.: RK3368) on Rockchip platform,
There are some failure with build up on timer driver for rockchip.
logs:
...
drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c:156:13: error: 'NO_IRQ'
undeclared
/tmp/ccdAnNy5.s:47: Error: missing immediate expression at operand
1 --
`dsb`
...
The problem was different semantics of dsb on btw arm32 and arm64,
Here we can convert the dsb with insteading of dsb(sy).
NO_IRQ definition is missing for ARM64, since NO_IRQ being -1 is a
legacy thing for ARM - all ARM drivers are supposed to be converted to
use <= 0 or == 0 to detect invalid IRQs, and _eventually_ once all
users
are gone, NO_IRQ deleted. Modern drivers should _all_ be using !irq to
detect invalid IRQs, and not using NO_IRQ.
Meanwhile, I change a bit to make the code more readability for driver
when I check the code style.
Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in v1:
- As Russell, Thomas, Daniel comments, let's replace NO_IRQ by '!irq'.
drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c | 29
+++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c index bb2c2b0..e1af449 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/rockchip_timer.c
@@ -17,16 +17,16 @@
#define TIMER_NAME "rk_timer"
-#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0 0x00
-#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1 0x04
-#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG 0x10
-#define TIMER_INT_STATUS 0x18
+#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0 0x00
+#define TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1 0x04
+#define TIMER_CONTROL_REG 0x10
+#define TIMER_INT_STATUS 0x18
-#define TIMER_DISABLE 0x0
-#define TIMER_ENABLE 0x1
-#define TIMER_MODE_FREE_RUNNING (0 << 1)
-#define TIMER_MODE_USER_DEFINED_COUNT (1 << 1)
-#define TIMER_INT_UNMASK (1 << 2)
+#define TIMER_DISABLE (0 << 0)
+#define TIMER_ENABLE (1 << 0)
+#define TIMER_MODE_FREE_RUNNING (0 << 1)
+#define TIMER_MODE_USER_DEFINED_COUNT (1 << 1)
+#define TIMER_INT_UNMASK (1 << 2)
not sure how Daniel sees this, but those could count as "unrelated
change", as
they have nothing to do with the arm64 build-fixes.
Yep, it's no related to the arm64 uild fixes.
I only make the code more readability for driver.
struct bc_timer {
struct clock_event_device ce;
@@ -49,14 +49,14 @@ static inline void __iomem *rk_base(struct
clock_event_device *ce) static inline void rk_timer_disable(struct
clock_event_device *ce) {
writel_relaxed(TIMER_DISABLE, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
- dsb();
+ dsb(sy);
}
static inline void rk_timer_enable(struct clock_event_device *ce,
u32
flags) {
writel_relaxed(TIMER_ENABLE | TIMER_INT_UNMASK | flags,
rk_base(ce) + TIMER_CONTROL_REG);
- dsb();
+ dsb(sy);
}
static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long cycles,
@@ -64,13 +64,13 @@ static void rk_timer_update_counter(unsigned long
cycles, {
writel_relaxed(cycles, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_LOAD_COUNT0);
writel_relaxed(0, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_LOAD_COUNT1);
- dsb();
+ dsb(sy);
}
static void rk_timer_interrupt_clear(struct clock_event_device *ce)
{
writel_relaxed(1, rk_base(ce) + TIMER_INT_STATUS);
- dsb();
+ dsb(sy);
}
static inline int rk_timer_set_next_event(unsigned long cycles,
@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ static void __init rk_timer_init(struct
device_node *np)
bc_timer.freq = clk_get_rate(timer_clk);
irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
- if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
+ if (!irq) {
pr_err("Failed to map interrupts for '%s'\n", TIMER_NAME);
return;
}
@@ -173,4 +173,5 @@ static void __init rk_timer_init(struct
device_node *np)
clockevents_config_and_register(ce, bc_timer.freq, 1, UINT_MAX);
}
+
unnecessary addition of a blank line (same reasons as above)
It's the same reason with the above.
CHECK: Please use a blank line after function/struct/union/enum
declarations
#176: FILE: rockchip_timer.c:176:
+}
+CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer",
rk_timer_init);
I know, we can ignore the above warning.
That's a bit better, I thnik.
CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(rk_timer, "rockchip,rk3288-timer",
rk_timer_init);
Heiko
_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
--
Thanks,
Caesar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/